-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
LVSP and LBBP Result in Similar or Improved LV Synchrony and Hemodynamics Compared to BVP
K. Curila, L. Poviser, P. Stros, P. Jurak, Z. Whinnett, M. Jastrzebski, P. Waldauf, R. Smisek, I. Viscor, M. Hozman, P. Osmancik, L. Kryze, J. Kautzner
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, srovnávací studie
- MeSH
- dysfunkce levé srdeční komory patofyziologie terapie MeSH
- elektrokardiografie * MeSH
- funkce levé komory srdeční fyziologie MeSH
- hemodynamika * fyziologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mezikomorová přepážka patofyziologie MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- srdeční resynchronizační terapie * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
BACKGROUND: The effect of left ventricular septal myocardial pacing (LVSP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) on ventricular synchrony and left ventricular (LV) hemodynamic status is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of LVSP and LBBP vs biventricular pacing (BVP) on ventricular electrical synchrony and hemodynamic status in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients. METHODS: In cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates with LV conduction disease, ventricular synchrony was assessed by measuring QRS duration (QRSd) and using ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography. LV electrical dyssynchrony was assessed as the difference between the first activation in leads V1 to V8 to the last from leads V4 to V8. LV hemodynamic status was estimated using invasive systolic blood pressure measurement during multiple transitions between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients with a mean LV ejection fraction of 29% and a mean QRSd of 168 ± 24 ms were included. Thirteen had ischemic cardiomyopathy. QRSd during BVP, LVSP, and LBBP was the same, but LBBP provided shorter LV electrical dyssynchrony than BVP (-10 ms; 95% CI: -16 to -4 ms; P = 0.001); the difference between LVSP and BVP was not significant (-5 ms; 95% CI: -12 to 1 ms; P = 0.10). LBBP was associated with higher systolic blood pressure than BVP (4%; 95% CI: 2%-5%; P < 0.001), whereas LVSP was not (1%; 95% CI: 0%-2%; P = 0.10). Hemodynamic differences during LBBP and LVSP vs BVP were more pronounced in nonischemic than ischemic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography allowed the documentation of differences in LV synchrony between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP, which were not observed by measuring QRSd. LVSP provided the same LV synchrony and hemodynamic status as BVP, while LBBP was better than BVP in both.
Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine Prague Czech Republic
Institute of Scientific Instruments Czech Academy of Sciences Brno Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24019889
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20241024111015.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 241015s2024 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1016/j.jacep.2024.04.022 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38829298
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Curila, Karol $u Cardiocenter, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: karol.curila@fnkv.cz
- 245 10
- $a LVSP and LBBP Result in Similar or Improved LV Synchrony and Hemodynamics Compared to BVP / $c K. Curila, L. Poviser, P. Stros, P. Jurak, Z. Whinnett, M. Jastrzebski, P. Waldauf, R. Smisek, I. Viscor, M. Hozman, P. Osmancik, L. Kryze, J. Kautzner
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: The effect of left ventricular septal myocardial pacing (LVSP) and left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) on ventricular synchrony and left ventricular (LV) hemodynamic status is poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of LVSP and LBBP vs biventricular pacing (BVP) on ventricular electrical synchrony and hemodynamic status in cardiac resynchronization therapy patients. METHODS: In cardiac resynchronization therapy candidates with LV conduction disease, ventricular synchrony was assessed by measuring QRS duration (QRSd) and using ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography. LV electrical dyssynchrony was assessed as the difference between the first activation in leads V1 to V8 to the last from leads V4 to V8. LV hemodynamic status was estimated using invasive systolic blood pressure measurement during multiple transitions between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP. RESULTS: A total of 35 patients with a mean LV ejection fraction of 29% and a mean QRSd of 168 ± 24 ms were included. Thirteen had ischemic cardiomyopathy. QRSd during BVP, LVSP, and LBBP was the same, but LBBP provided shorter LV electrical dyssynchrony than BVP (-10 ms; 95% CI: -16 to -4 ms; P = 0.001); the difference between LVSP and BVP was not significant (-5 ms; 95% CI: -12 to 1 ms; P = 0.10). LBBP was associated with higher systolic blood pressure than BVP (4%; 95% CI: 2%-5%; P < 0.001), whereas LVSP was not (1%; 95% CI: 0%-2%; P = 0.10). Hemodynamic differences during LBBP and LVSP vs BVP were more pronounced in nonischemic than ischemic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-high-frequency electrocardiography allowed the documentation of differences in LV synchrony between LBBP, LVSP, and BVP, which were not observed by measuring QRSd. LVSP provided the same LV synchrony and hemodynamic status as BVP, while LBBP was better than BVP in both.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 12
- $a srdeční resynchronizační terapie $x metody $7 D058406
- 650 12
- $a hemodynamika $x fyziologie $7 D006439
- 650 12
- $a elektrokardiografie $7 D004562
- 650 _2
- $a dysfunkce levé srdeční komory $x patofyziologie $x terapie $7 D018487
- 650 _2
- $a funkce levé komory srdeční $x fyziologie $7 D016277
- 650 _2
- $a mezikomorová přepážka $x patofyziologie $7 D054088
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
- 700 1_
- $a Poviser, Lukas $u Cardiocenter, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Stros, Petr $u Cardiocenter, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Jurak, Pavel $u Institute of Scientific Instruments, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Whinnett, Zachary $u Department of Cardiology, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom
- 700 1_
- $a Jastrzebski, Marek $u First Department of Cardiology, Interventional Electrocardiology and Hypertension, Jagiellonian University, Medical College, Krakow, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Waldauf, Petr $u Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Smisek, Radovan $u Institute of Scientific Instruments, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Viscor, Ivo $u Institute of Scientific Instruments, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Hozman, Marek $u Cardiocenter, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Osmancik, Pavel $u Cardiocenter, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Kralovske Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kryze, Lukas $u Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kautzner, Josef $u Institute of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00193518 $t JACC. Clinical electrophysiology $x 2405-5018 $g Roč. 10, č. 7 Pt 2 (2024), s. 1722-1732
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38829298 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20241015 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20241024111009 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2202227 $s 1231862
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 10 $c 7 Pt 2 $d 1722-1732 $e 20240516 $i 2405-5018 $m JACC. Clinical electrophysiology $n JACC Clin Electrophysiol $x MED00193518
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20241015